so that it is always assumed that the driver is to blame and the onus is on the driver to prove otherwise. it's really that simple. we would see far more careful drivers. I think they do this in sweden or somewhere like that.

sees like it puts too much down to the individual distracts that it is probably larger traffic planning policies that need to be addressed, and whether a cities roads can realistically handle both methods of transport safely

don't think I do, I'm in no rush, certainly not everyday. but as a pedestrian when you see the green man and see a car coming, you can be about 99% certain the car will stop, cyclists more like 40% at best

We've had discussions on here before about the circumstances that lead cylists to pass through red lights, and why it's often actually the safest course of action, but anyway, following the rules involves more than just stopping at red lights:

It's certainly not safer for any pedestrians trying to cross the road though, which goes back to zxcvbnm's point above - too many cyclists currently behave like dicks around pedestrians. Lots don't, but too many do, and it's not to be encouraged.

nah, confirmation bias suggests I have a preexisting bias against cyclists clouding my experiences, its the other way around my experience is the basis of my view. I'll accept in some situations a cyclist might have to make the decision to skip a light for their own safety, doesn't explain the numerous times you see them plough through, not even slowing and shouting 'GET THE F-OUT OF THE WAY' at any pedestrian with the audacity to cross at the green man, reckon you could stand at the crossing by camden tube and see that happen within an hour at most. it is not a rare occurrence, a large proportion of cyclists just think its ok not not stop

it is not really a derail if it is relevant to the discussion. and I still dispute confirmation bias, it is something that I used to see literally everyday, even if I am ignoring all the times it doesn't happen that wouldn't disprove the basic observation that I've never seen a car do that where as cyclists all the time.

To say that someone has never seen a car jump a light in 30 years of using crossings (in a discussion about cyclists doing it) is a great example of confirmation bias I think and this video shows that the LTDA had that same mentality. "Oh look, they're not *really* skipping a light because they sneak through when the light changes."

I think *part* of the reason people focus on cyclists particularly at lights is that (in my experience) the majority of drivers going through red lights do so just as they change rather than in the middle of the red phase, where as it feels like quite a few cyclists are doing it whenever they please regardless of the phase the lights are at. It's rare I've seen a car/van/lorry/bus jump a red light by more than about half a second, but relatively common to see people thinking they'll get through on amber and missing it.

That's not to say that just jumping the light as it changes *should* be seen as a lesser offence than ploughing through regardless, but I think that perception certainly persists.

And it's obviously much more entrenched in motorists. As a cyclist I have to hold my hand up and say that there have been occasions when I've put the hammer on to get through an amber light too, but I do accept that that puts me in the wrong (incidentally one of the issues that never seems to get mentioned is that cyclists are putting physical effort into what they're doing and may well have their judgment impaired by temporary pain/fatigue, not that that's actually an excuse.)

My worry based on cycling in London though is that for a non-trivial number of cyclists jumping red lights is similarly viewed as just something people do. It does annoy the hell out of me, it just isn't necessary. I don't believe it makes the cyclist any safer and I don't believe it saves them any time on their journey.

I don't think I ever mentioned jumping lights, although obviously linked, I was specifically talking about when there has been a green man which explicitly tells pedestrians it is safe to cross, can honestly say I have never seen a car go though when the solid green man is there, cyclists do it all the time. cars driving through as it turns red, yes I have seen that but there is a delay between that and the green man. people might think this is a ridiculous distinction to make but it is an important one

it is a real issue, you patiently wait your turn* to cross the road, the green man appears you see a cyclist coming and you do have to make a judgement is it going to stop or is it going to crash into me, with a car I've never had to do that. the rest of this about confirmation bias, skipping as the lights are changing, are just technicalities.

*I know pedestrians ignore the rules all the time and will cross if nothings coming, but usually common sense and doesn't risk anything, most cars use common sense and don't risk anything, but it seems a lot of cyclists think they have priority for some reason.

I don't see what the distinction is there. In most cases the person in the car or on the bike doesn't know when the green man is lit, so that shouldn't make any difference to their behaviour.

Anyway, this is a really odd position to be arguing. Lots of cyclists go through reds. No idea where this comes from that more cars than cyclists use 'common sense' - you could also argue that it's common sense for a cyclist to move across away from a stationary vehicle when at a pedestrian crossing with no-one on it. I have - I think once - seen a cyclist try to take priority over pedestrians when a green man sign was lit. Like, seriously once. And I think he'd fucked up and not see the lights. Which makes that guy an idiot; but cyclists taking priority at crossings over pedestrians at crossings is just.. not a thing. Much more common - and is this what you're talking about? - is when they try to sneak through or around while pedestrians are still on it. But that's a different thing.

there is a clear distinction, cars may go through a light when it has just changed, but because there is not an instant sync between red light going on and green man going on it is not the same thing, because at this point the pedestrians have not been given the signal it is safe. It is very different to a cyclist approaching an already red light and deciding to go through it, when the safe to cross signal has been given to pedestrians. It is true cars/cyclists don't always see the red/green men themselves but they have enough information to infer it from the traffic lights changing times.

If you have never seen it then it is probably confirmation bias, you are only counting the times it doesnt happen. it is definitely a thing, it may not be a case of them thinking they take priority but it seems some think it is fine for them to try and weave through the pedestrians, as if the lights should only apply to cars.

yeah definitely, I'm not saying it is ok for drivers to skip an amber/red, what I'm saying is it is a lot worse to skip an unambiguous solid red and that it is rare to see a car to do it but not so rare to see a cyclist do it.

but seeing as most fatal accidents occur on motorways, you'd think that the basic principles would be at least taught, if not tested.

Like 'speed awareness courses' - motorway driving could be part classroom based and then an hour or two practising with an instructor. It could be compulsory to do it within 1 year of passing your test.

I cycle to work most days. I'm more likely to cycle like a cunt than I am drive like one. I would never even dream of jumping a red in my car, or driving after a few beers, or with a broken light. But I have done all these things on a bicycle and have seen loads of other people do it too.

Only really got one after a woman threatened to smash my fucking face in for having the audacity to do *something* to provoke her into deliberately trying to knock me off my bike. Oh, and I slipped over on some leaves with would've been funny to watch back.

My friend got stopped by the police whilst I was cycling with her and the policeman was rude and aggressive towards her until I had circled back and he'd realised I had a helmet cam on. Fucking wanker. He also called her outfit into question and insinuated she's not come from work as she'd suggested. Denied this once being called up on until being reminded that the camera had recorded it all. Fucking wanker.

It's also massively reduced instances where I would've run red lights in the past, and other general law-bending. Which is a good thing. Also been pretty handy in "near-misses" to be able to go back and see what, if anything, I did wrong/could've done differently.

You still look like a wanker though. (This bit is unrelated to helmet cameras)

but as a frequent pedestrian / cyclist and driver in central Bristol where there are a LOT of all three and more bikes than other cities I have been to, I have had the most issues from bikes than the other two groups. Getting nudged by a lycra wanker when they would likely go batshit if a car even went near their path isn't fun. Being told to get out of the fucking way by a lycra wanker when I was standing on a narrow footpath / bus stop as they pelted along the pavement wasn't fun. The cars crawl so slowly they were just an annoyance rather than anything dangerous.

probably more than by motorists these days. But it's really silly to call them the biggest threat on the roads (and that's not just your post; it happens loads) when it's the HGVs that are actually killing people (and not due to accidents caused by interactions between cyclists, either).

I am increasingly seeing it on bikes but rarely on cars. Then you get bellend blogs where they smugly show bad driving (while no doubt their own terrible cycling is ignored). Hopefully everyone can have one, then you can get some kind of truth behind most incidents.

Life's too short to compile a dossier of bad road users. I'd like a camera on my bike so I can watch my commute speeded up at home and fantasise about what it'd be like if I was actually fit, or if Superman took up cycling from my house to my office.